Remove deprecated APIs from OpenApplicationWithPath.

Remove deprecated APIs from OpenApplicationWithPath.

-[NSWorkspace launchApplicationAtURL:...] is a drop-in replacement for
LSOpenApplication. The one tricky bit is that LSOpenApplication returns a
ProcessSerialNumber which NSRunningApplication does not have. It seems like we
were only using that ProcessSerialNumber to send an Apple Event, which we can do
directly with launchApplicationAtURL:..., so I just used that instead.

BUG=650790

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:23:22]

Description was changed from

==========
Fix deprecated launch API.

BUG=
==========

to

==========
Remove deprecated APIs from OpenApplicationWithPath.

-[NSWorkspace launchApplicationAtURL:...] is a drop-in replacement for
LSOpenApplication. The one tricky bit is that LSOpenApplication returns a
ProcessSerialNumber which NSRunningApplication does not have. It seems like we
were only using that ProcessSerialNumber to send an Apple Event, which we can do
directly with launchApplicationAtURL:..., so I just used that instead.

BUG=650790
==========

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:23:58]

Description was changed from

==========
Remove deprecated APIs from OpenApplicationWithPath.

-[NSWorkspace launchApplicationAtURL:...] is a drop-in replacement for
LSOpenApplication. The one tricky bit is that LSOpenApplication returns a
ProcessSerialNumber which NSRunningApplication does not have. It seems like we
were only using that ProcessSerialNumber to send an Apple Event, which we can do
directly with launchApplicationAtURL:..., so I just used that instead.

BUG=650790
==========

to

==========
Remove deprecated APIs from OpenApplicationWithPath.

-[NSWorkspace launchApplicationAtURL:...] is a drop-in replacement for
LSOpenApplication. The one tricky bit is that LSOpenApplication returns a
ProcessSerialNumber which NSRunningApplication does not have. It seems like we
were only using that ProcessSerialNumber to send an Apple Event, which we can do
directly with launchApplicationAtURL:..., so I just used that instead.

BUG=650790
==========

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:24:03]

The CQ bit was checked by erikchen@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:24:30]

erikchen@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ tapted@chromium.org

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:24:31]

tapted: Please review.

AppShimInteractiveTest passes when run locally, but I bet we still need to
manually test this functionality. Any ideas?

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-06 01:24:48]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 
https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/v2/patch-status/codereview.chromium.or...

[tapted, 2016-10-06 01:28:41]

On 2016/10/06 01:24:31, erikchen wrote:
> tapted: Please review.
> 
> AppShimInteractiveTest passes when run locally, but I bet we still need to
> manually test this functionality. Any ideas?

ohnoz! I think eugene has a fix in the CQ for some of this -
https://codereview.chromium.org/2390953003/

However, it hasn't yet dealt with the ReplyEventHandler part -- I'll start
looking at that.

[Eugene But (OOO till 7-30), 2016-10-06 01:36:36]

On 2016/10/06 01:28:41, tapted wrote:
> On 2016/10/06 01:24:31, erikchen wrote:
> > tapted: Please review.
> > 
> > AppShimInteractiveTest passes when run locally, but I bet we still need to
> > manually test this functionality. Any ideas?
> 
> ohnoz! I think eugene has a fix in the CQ for some of this -
> https://codereview.chromium.org/2390953003/
> 
> However, it hasn't yet dealt with the ReplyEventHandler part -- I'll start
> looking at that.
I was fixing https://crbug.com/650854 :( Looks like some Fixit bugs have
overlapping work :(

[erikchen, 2016-10-06 01:56:17]

On 2016/10/06 01:36:36, Eugene But wrote:
> On 2016/10/06 01:28:41, tapted wrote:
> > On 2016/10/06 01:24:31, erikchen wrote:
> > > tapted: Please review.
> > > 
> > > AppShimInteractiveTest passes when run locally, but I bet we still need to
> > > manually test this functionality. Any ideas?
> > 
> > ohnoz! I think eugene has a fix in the CQ for some of this -
> > https://codereview.chromium.org/2390953003/
> > 
> > However, it hasn't yet dealt with the ReplyEventHandler part -- I'll start
> > looking at that.
> I was fixing https://crbug.com/650854 :( Looks like some Fixit bugs have
> overlapping work :(

:( feel free to cannabilize my CL to make your CL work.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-06 01:57:19]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-10-06 01:57:20]

Dry run: Exceeded global retry quota